• Korea Trade Review
• /
• v.42 no.2
• /
• pp.205-225
• /
• 2017

The study attempts to verify the case related to the notice of payment refusal by issuing bank regarding discrepancy in transport document under L/C(Letter of Credit) transaction. Considering the high portion of trade between Korea and China, Korean companies and banks in L/C transaction should be careful about many unpredictable situations. The case of this study is that Chinese seller(beneficiary) initiated a civil suit against Industrial Bank of Korea to Chinese court and Chinese courts in the first and second trials judged that the notice of payment refusal by Industrial bank of Korea doesn't satisfy Article 16, (c) (ii) (iii) in UCP 600. However, Industrial Bank of Korea implements the judgement even though the judgement is highly biased to Chinese seller. Considering the judgement by Chinese courts, the study suggests some countermeasures to Korean companies and banks which opened L/C. First, the issuing bank should describe the contents of discrepancy specifically based on Article 16, (c) in UCP 600. Second, it is necessary to insert a clause regarding governing law in the L/C contract like sales contract. Third, considering the biased judgement by Chinese court and difficulty in execution of foreign judgement in China, it is recommended to using arbitration as a method of dispute resolution such as ICLOCA and DOCDEX Rules which are international system operated by international instruments because it has legal effects to parties in L/C contracts if the issuing bank inserts arbitration clause in L/C.

• THE INTERNATIONAL COMMERCE & LAW REVIEW
• /
• v.7
• /
• pp.749-773
• /
• 1994

• International Commerce and Information Review
• /
• v.14 no.4
• /
• pp.433-456
• /
• 2012

The confirming bank undertakes to make payment to the beneficiary, provided that a complying presentation is made and complies with its confirmation. In case L/C fraud is evident, though, the confirming bank as well as the issuing bank does not have the obligation to make payment. That is, the confirming bank does not take the risks involving documentary fraud. The confirming bank cannot exercise the right to recourse toward the beneficiary or the nominated bank when the issuing bank finds the discrepancies which the confirming bank has not noticed. This is because under UCP600, the issuing bank or the confirming bank cannot refuse to make payment with the cause of documentary discrepancy after 5 banking days following the presentation of documents. Even if the issuing bank accepts the discrepant documents following the confirming bank's request to do so, the confirming bank does not have the responsibility for the confirmation. When under Usance Negotiation Credit, the confirming bank acts as the nominated bank, the confirming bank should make payment in no time if the beneficiary presents complying documents. Therefore, unless the confirming bank intends to make immediate payment, they should consider using Deferred Payment or Acceptance L/C in Usance Credit. It is also safer for the beneficiary to have the reimbursing bank's undertaking to the reimbursement than just have confirmation of the credit because in the latter case they may not have full payment due to disputes regarding discrepancies of the documents even if they have confirmation of the credit.

• International Commerce and Information Review
• /
• v.13 no.4
• /
• pp.275-295
• /
• 2011

Any attempt which requires banks to consider non-documentary conditions would destroy autonomy principle and increase the risks of the bank in L/C transactions. Therefore, non-documentary conditions are disregarded in the letter of credit. This provision was first introduced in UCP500, but later, ICC Position Paper No.3 added that if L/C requires documents related to non-documentary conditions, it cannot be disregarded. While the language in UCP600 is basically the same as that in UCP500, there is a difference between the two in that the former disregards the documents related to non-documentary conditions even if they are required by L/C. However, it should be remembered that international standard banking practice does not disregard all of non-documentary conditions. It recognizes the validity of some non-documentary conditions which it is not feasible to change into documentary conditions. That is, such non-documentary conditions as can be determined from an index specified in the guarantee or identified from the issuing bank's own records or their normal operations are recognized as valid in legal cases. ISP98 and UR00758 do not consider these as non-documentary conditions. The applicant should be cautious not to include non-documentary conditions in their applications.

• THE INTERNATIONAL COMMERCE & LAW REVIEW
• /
• v.46
• /
• pp.159-177
• /
• 2010

This work intends to study some problems in relation to the issuance of letters of credit. Those problems are the delay of issuing letters of credit, the reissuing letters of credit, and the issuing letters of credit in the third party's name. Sellers and buyers must keep in mind that the supply of letter of credit by buyer is the condition precedent for a seller's shipment obligation. A seller has no obligation to ship the goods until he receives the letter of credit by buyer's bank, issuing bank. An issuing bank can have the risk that an original letter of credit and a reissued letter of credit can be used double in the exporting country. The most safe method for issuing bank is to cancel the original letter of credit and to reissue a new letter of credit. When an issuing bank issues a letter of credit in the third party's name, the bank should investigate the background of the transaction and give the buyer a proper line of credit.

• International Commerce and Information Review
• /
• v.16 no.2
• /
• pp.89-109
• /
• 2014

The purpose of price escalation clauses has the effect of increasing the L/C value subject to external pricing mechanisms. This will be found inter alia in metals and oil products transactions. Such a clause gives rise to a question. That is, whether it is enforceable or whether it constitutes a letter of credit. The problem is what to reference to a source outside the context of a letter of credit constitutes a non-documentary condition rendering the undertaking something other than a letter of credit. Reference to an objective and readily available index is not something that renders the undertaking obscure and is not "non-documentary in the sense that it is possible to make an objective verification of the data. The possible solution is that not every non-documentary condition will be disregarded. For example, an index specified in the credit will not be disregarded as stipulated in ISP98 and URDG758. If a non-documentary is "central and fundamental", it seems that the parties intended a dependent payment obligations. The most common means of overcoming this conflicts of interests is to issue an instrument incorporatingan escalation clause, but capping the bank's maximum payment obligation.

• NEWSLETTER 전기공업
• /
• no.98-6 s.199
• /
• pp.8-19
• /
• 1998

• Korea Trade Review
• /
• v.48 no.3
• /
• pp.23-41
• /
• 2023

The seller and the buyer write down the agreed details in the trade contract as trade contract clauses. In the case where a letter of credit is agreed to be the payment condition, the buyer shall open a letter of credit to the seller with the shipping date specified in the trade contract through its bank. In this case, the legal relationship between the performance date of the trade contract and the shipment date of the letter of credit, the change of the performance date of the trade contract due to the change of the trade contract and the change of the shipment date specified in the letter of credit, the seller's letter of credit A problem arises in the legal interpretation of the approval period and the change request period. Therefore, this paper analyzed the precedents of the Seongnam Branch of the Suwon District Court and the Seoul High Court related to these legal issues. The performance date of a trade contract is the seller's delivery date and the buyer's payment date. In the letter of credit transaction, the date of performance of the trade contract is regarded as the date of shipment and the date of negotiation of documents specified in the letter of credit. The seller must decide whether to accept the letter of credit within 5 banking days after receiving the letter of credit from the buyer. After this period has elapsed, the seller cannot refuse the letter of credit. However, if the buyer is unable to decide whether to accept the letter of credit within 5 banking days due to reasons attributable to the buyer, the delivery date specified in the letter of credit will be extended. If the seller requests an amendment to the letter of credit, the buyer must accept it and open the letter of credit the seller desires to the seller. If the buyer refuses the seller's request to change the letter of credit, company A has the obligation to change and reopen the letter of credit as requested by company B. Expect by agreeing on the quotation As it is a fundamental breach of contract stipulated in Article 25 of the United Nations Convention on Contracts for the International Sale of Goods, company B can cancel the trade contract and claim damages from company A. Compensation for damages caused by Company A's breach of the trade contract shall be an amount equal to the loss suffered by Company B as a result of the breach, including loss of profits.

• International Commerce and Information Review
• /
• v.16 no.1
• /
• pp.247-269
• /
• 2014

This study is to present alternatives of strategical utilization of e-L/C in respective of transaction cost. Documentary credit is most used for trade importers' credit quality and the guarantee of the purchase price as the form of payment in export and import business dealings. The beneficiary must provide the documents required in a letter of credit in order to claim payment documents from the issuing bank, this leads to certain complexity during the procedure in practice, the preparation and the expenses of significant requirements and additional documents as well as in completing demands from the credit. In a result, there has been issues raised about the aspects of time and cost during the payment process. The outcome of such problems caused by delays in the existing trade procedure is the public to require the use of e-L/C in order to improve problems from the 'Transaction Cost' side. This study provides e-L/C's use to overcome the problems that are appearing from 'Transaction Cost' side as the aspect of time and the cost. In order to do so, we have to identify the problems in the original credit and e-L/C. Thus, provide the propose strategy of e-L/C from the Transaction Cost aspect.

• Journal of Korea Port Economic Association
• /
• v.29 no.2
• /
• pp.255-275
• /
• 2013

The purpose of the study is to examine compliance criteria for documents of the Letter of Credit(L/C) by the Korean Supreme Court in practical use. The judgement criteria of the court in documents' examination is supported by the doctrine of strict compliance. And, in examination of documents by the Supreme Court, the difference between documents presented and the credit should be followed by the allowance of international standard banking practices. In this case, the Supreme Court makes a reference for ICC's opinion or decision proposed as the international standard banking practices, or otherwise admit by exploring the practices. However, when documents reviewing by the bankers' auditors, it is very difficult for them to judge in a short time due to the lack of high level of knowledges and insights. As shown the cases of this study, the doctrine of strict compliance of an L/C be relaxed, and most of the recent precedents be ruled by the exception of the doctrine. Because, therefore, it is difficult for to documents reviewers of bank to judge these consistencies, conducting arbitrary document review will be inevitable. As a result, it will be difficult for banks and applicants to ensure the strictness of the documents, and free use of L/Cs in international transactions will be avoided. Finally, the expanded usage of the electronic negotiation system that simplifies the highly difficult compliance criteria to ensure the strictness of documents will be needed, and not only be eradicated the acts of arbitrary documents examination practices, but also be promoted the freely usage of L/Cs.